I see there are two choices, a 90bhp 5-speed manual gearbox or the 110ps with the 6-speed gearbox.

Looks like they have copied from the VAG book.

When we bought the Skoda Fabia it was a 95 PS 5 speed or a 110 PS 6 speed. Our first drive was in a 95 PS 5 speed one and it was fine. About 2700 at 70 mph and decent gaps in the ratios. Pulled really well.

But the 6 speed 110 PS was only another £600 but finding one to drive was not easy. Had to travel but it was worth it. Not only does the 110 have 15 more PS's it has about 30 more torques and these were really noticeable on the open road. The gear ratio gaps were similar but in 6th its about 2300 at 70 mph making for really relaxed cruising. Only found one hill so far on a motorway/dual carriageway where it needs 5th to maintain speed, the A64 just before Malton.

But with the Fabia it was a bit of an easy choice, for your £600 not only did you get the extrapower/torque and extra gear, you also got better brakes.

So what are the differences in spec on the Renault and how much extra is it?

Five speed boxes seem so yesterday. I had a 1980 Renault 18GTS which had a 5 speed box years before they became standard on most British built saloon cars.

Might not have been a saloon, but the Austin Maxi had a 5 speed box 11 years before your Renault 18 was made.

Problem with the Maxi box (especially the early ones) was the gears were never in the same place twice. A mate of mine had one and did not realise for quite a while it actually had a 5th.

The Renault 16 had 5 gears back in the 70's. That was probably interesting since it was a column change.

Beyond about four, the number of gears is relatively unimportant. For long distance economy the mph per 1000 revs in top gear is the main consideration. My old A6 'limousine' with the ZF 5 speed box registered 32mph per 1000revs, but my current A8 'sport' with the ZF 6 speed box is geared for performance, and registers only 30mph per 1000 revs.

Our 6 speed Fabia does just over 30 mph per 1000 revs. What were Audi thinking when they geared a 6 litre W12 to 30 mph per 1000 revs. The engine should produce enough torques to move the moon so 30 mph is ridiculously low.

Depends what you want from a car. Its more sedate LWB cousin 'limo' has a higher geared final drive. My contact in Kansas tells me his 2006 LWB W12 shows 2150 at 80mph which translates to around 37mph per 1000 revs. Audi geared the SWB 'sport' for mid range performance and acceleration, a bit like a rally car but obviously not as few mph per 1000 revs in top gear. So the 0-60 time is less and in theory it could even have a better top speed than the LWB if the 250kph limiter was disabled - it might well do 180 mph at 6,000 revs.

I was working at a Saab dealer when the 2.3 turbo debuted in the 9000. I remember reading in a magazine at the time how it would do 50-70 in 5th gear quicker than a Ferrari Testarossa. All very impressive, but I was thinking that the Ferrari is geared to do 180mph, whereas the Saab topped out at about 140mph. Were the Ferrari's 5th gear the same as the Saab's, would it still take longer to do 50-70?, unlikely.

First 6 speed manual I remember driving was actually a VW Sharan (115bhp PD TDI) demonstrator at the VW dealer I worked for. Taking it round the bypass, at an indicated 60mph in 6th (if memory serves) the engine was pulling around 1800rpm.

Our Jazz CVT (stepped), under the right circumstances, would be pulling about 2100rpm at 70mph. Which may seem a good thing on a long journey, but the lack of torque meant the slightest incline (or even headwind) would send the revs soaring. Maybe not a problem in flat countries, but it made for tiresome dual carriageway/motorway progress in this one, well certainly between North Aberdeenshire and Glasgow!.